Nankivell and Secretary, Department of Social Services (Social services second review)

This matter concerned an appeal by an applicant against the cancellation of his disability support pension (DSP). The dispute centred on whether the applicant met the qualification requirements for the DSP at the time of its cancellation. The decision was made by Ms A F Cunningham, Senior Member, of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal.

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was to determine whether the applicant satisfied the qualification requirements for a DSP under section 94 of the *Social Security Act 1991* (Cth) on the date his DSP was cancelled. This involved assessing whether the applicant's medical conditions attracted a sufficient impairment rating under the relevant tables and whether he continued to be unable to work.

The Tribunal considered medical evidence, including a report from Dr Chris Hughes, which identified lumbar disc degeneration and prolapse, and osteoarthritis/meniscal degeneration of both knees as the conditions with the most significant impact on the applicant's ability to function. A Job Capacity Assessment Report concluded that while these conditions were permanent, they did not attract an impairment rating under the relevant tables. The Tribunal found that there was insufficient medical evidence regarding the permanence of these conditions at the time of cancellation to attract an impairment rating. Although the applicant met the general physical impairment requirements under s 94(1)(a) of the Act, his total impairment rating for his back and knee conditions was assessed at only 10 points, failing to meet the required 20 points under s 94(1)(b). Consequently, the Tribunal did not need to consider the applicant's inability to work under s 94(2).

The Tribunal affirmed the decision under review, meaning the cancellation of the applicant's disability support pension was upheld.